Page | 1
Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College
55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: XXXXXXXXXX
PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D
Approved: ****
Unit Code and Title: SBM1203 Venture/Project Economics and Finance
Assessment Overview
Assessment Task
Weighting Due Length ULO
Assessment 1: Weekly Online QuizA
In weeks 2 to 10 students will
complete an online quiz based on
material from previous weeks.
All tests are open book
40% Week 3 Approx.
30 mins
each
ULO-1
ULO-2
ULO-3
Assessment 2: Group Pecha kucha
Case Study
A test including a series of short
answer practical and theoretical
questions. The test will cover
materials covered from week 1 to
week 5
(Open Book)
30% Week 8 20 slides
400 second
presentation
ULO-2
ULO-4
Assessment 3: Individual Case
Study
Group assignment on analysing real-
world (simulated) financial data and
information and interpreting the
outcomes using the concept and
principles of finance you have learnt
in this unit.
30% Week XXXXXXXXXXULO-2
ULO-3
ULO-4
Assessment 1: Quiz
Due date: Weeks 2 - 10
Group/individual: Individual
Word count / Time provided: Maximum 30 minutes
Weighting: 40%
Assessment Details:
On-line quizzes will be conducted in weeks 2 to 9 inclusive. Some will be conducted in class time while
others will be out of class time. Whether the quiz is in class or out of class time will be announced in
class each week along with the duration of the quiz. Students should therefore be prepared to
complete the the quiz in class each week. Each quiz will be worth 5% of the final mark with only the
est 8 results contributing to the final mark. The maximum mark for this assess ement is 40% .
Marking Information: Each quiz will be worth 5% of the final mark with only the best 8 results
contributing to the final mark. The maximum mark for this assess ement is 40% .
Assessment Briefs
Page | 2
Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College
55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: XXXXXXXXXX
PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D
Approved: ****
Assessment 2: Pecha Kucha Presentation
Due date: Week 8
Group/individual: Group
Word count / Time provided: 20 Slides, 20 seconds per slide - presentation in class
Weighting: 30%
Assessment Details:
Pecha kucha is loosely translated from Japanese as ‘chit-chat’. Groups of 3 or 4 will be formed in
week 2 and will be assigned a case study or provide their own. In the later case, the Unit
Coordinators approval will be required before proceeding. The assessment is designed to assess your
technical, financial, economical and analytical skills in planning , evaluating and implementing a
project effectively and efficiently. Your team will complete a project viability presentation on the
case.
No written report is required. Rather, teams will present their report in a Pecha kucha format ie:
exactly 20 slides (not including the title slide) delived in a time of 6 minutes 20 seconds for the
presentation (average of 20 seconds per slide). Marks will be deducted for reports that do not meet
these criteria.
The presentation should cover (as a minimum) a description of the project, alternative approaches if
any, assumptions, risks, financial analysis, sensitivity analysis and recommended action.
Marking Information: The Report will be marked out of 100 marks and will be weighted 30% of the
total unit mark.
The marking ru
ic is attached as Appendix 1
Assessment 3: Case Study
Due date: Week 11
Group/individual: Individual
Word count / Time provided: 3000 words
Weighting: 30%
Assessment Details:
Context
As an project manager you will need funding to complete your project/venture. A corporate decision
has been made that all funding is internal. You may, however, argue that alternate sources may be
appropriate (i.e. banks, angel investors, micro-finance organisations, crowd funding, etc.).
You will need to present your ideas in a succinct, coherent and persuasive report, to assess the viability
of your project.
Page | 3
Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College
55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: XXXXXXXXXX
PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D
Approved: ****
This assessment simulates this professional practice, where you present the key analysis to persuade
your potential key stakeholders to invest in your project in a safe environment.
You should consider the following:
• Identify the stakeholders you are presenting to in this assessment. In this case assume that
the lecturer is the manager of the company.
• Introduce the project idea. Include what the idea is and why it matters to the business. You
are free to make any assumptions about the business as needed – provided they are logical.
• Provide details of your financial analysis and assessment of the project viability. Ensure that
you consider the key risks and the results of sensitivity analyses.
• Close the deal. Why should the manager approve the project. Be persuasive.
Marking Information: The Report will be marked out of 100 marks and will be weighted 30% of the
total unit mark.
The marking ru
ic is attached as Appendix 2
Page | 4
Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College
55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: XXXXXXXXXX
PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D
Approved: ****
Appendix 1
Assessment 2: Pecha kucha presentation - Marking Ru
ic
Criteria
HD
(85-100)
D
(75-84)
CR
(65-74)
PASS
(50-64)
FAIL
(0-49)
Personal
Professional
Presentation
10%
Early, prepared, confident, eye
contact, dress code: impeccable.
On time, prepared, confident, eye
contact, dress code: very smart.
On time, prepared, confident,
eye contact, dress code:
smart.
On time, prepared, nervous, eye
contact, dress code: ok.
Late, unprepared,
untidy
Delivery
30%
Holds attention of entire
audience with the use of direct
eye contact, seldom looking at
notes
Speaks with fluctuation in
volume and inflection to
maintain audience interest and
emphasize key points
Consistent use of direct eye
contact with audience, with little or
no use of notes.
Speaks with higher than
satisfactory variation of volume
and inflection
Displays some eye contact
with audience, while reading
occasionally from the notes.
Speaks with satisfactory
variation of volume and
inflection
Holds little eye contact with
audience, as entire report is
ead from notes.
Speaks in low volume and/or
monotonous tone, which causes
audience to disengage
Looks disinterested, no
eye contact, reads from
notes.
Inaudible.
Content,
Organisation and
Understanding of
Research
35%
Demonstrates full knowledge
y answering all class
questions with explanations &
elaboration.
Provides clear purpose and
subject; pertinent examples,
facts, and/or statistics; supports
conclusions/ ideas with
evidence.
Is at ease with expected answers
to all questions, without
elaboration
Has clear purpose and subject;
examples, facts, and/or statistics
that support the subject; includes
data or evidence that supports
conclusions.
Is comfortable with
information and is able to
answer questions
Attempts to define purpose
and subject; provides
examples, facts, and/or
statistics, at an above
satisfactory level.
Has little grasp of information
and is able to answer only
udimentary questions.
Does not clearly define subject
and purpose; provides weak
support of subject; gives
insufficient support for ideas or
conclusions
Presentation shows no
knowledge of topic
Person is not prepared
Audience
Engagement
15%
Demonstrates strong
enthusiasm about topic during
entire presentation
Significantly increases
audience understanding &
knowledge of topic.
Shows enthusiastic feelings about
topic
Raises audience
understanding & awareness of
most points.
Shows mixed feelings about
the topic being presented
Raises audience
understanding & knowledge
of the subject area.
Shows little interest in topic
presented
Raises audience
understanding and knowledge of
some points.
Disinterested in topic.
Distracts audience
while other team
members present.
Compliance with
specifications
10%
Full compliance
20 slides 400 seconds ± 5%
Largely compliant
20 slides 400 seconds ± 15%
Reasonably compliant
20 slides 400 seconds ± 25%
Some compliance
20 slides 400 seconds ± 50%
Little compliance
GRADE
Page | 5
Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College
55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: XXXXXXXXXX
PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D
Approved: ****
Appendix 2
Assessment 3 Case Study – Marking Ru
ic
Criteria
HD
(85-100)
D
(75-84)
CR
(65-74)
PASS
(50-64)
FAIL
(0-49)
Evaluation and
explanation of
financial viability
and funds.
40%
Critical and thorough evaluation of
the financial viability and funds
equired.
Mastery of concepts and
application to new situations/further
learning.
Clear and accurate evaluation of
the financial viability and funds
equired
Well demonstrated capacity to
explain and apply relevant
concepts.
An adequate attempt to evaluate
the financial viability and funds
equired.
Demonstrates a capacity to
explain and apply relevant
concepts.
A basic attempt to evaluate the
financial viability and funds
equired.
Explanation resembles a recall or
summary of key ideas.
No/limited evidence of
evaluation.
Explanation